Just about ten years ago I wrote an editorial (for another publication) about utility automation conference timing and venues. The gist of the message was the (apparently) radical notion that conferences, trade shows and symposia produced by various professional associations, conference developers and trade groups should consider meeting on common ground. That is, why not consider ‘co-locating’ (i.e., at a common time and location) these events instead of holding them at different times and different locations every year? As we all know, for many years there has been a rising tide of complaints by exhibitors and attendees alike about the growing preponderance of events that routinely overlap or otherwise conflict while placing what can be an excruciating strain on time, resources and budgets for all concerned. Indeed, some events are scheduled so close to others that deciding whether to attend and/or exhibit at one or the other is often determined purely by logistics rather than the value of the events themselves. And, having to make new plans from scratch for multiple events every year is both difficult and time consuming – not to mention costly.
After writing that column, I personally followed up with a half dozen conference organizers to see if I could turn the concept into reality. But while most of them listened politely to my co-location concepts and nodded at all the appropriate junctures – indicating that they understood what I was saying – I soon realized that all I was getting was lip service. After much reflection on those conversations, I came to realize that I hadn’t really gotten to first base with any of them.
In trying to put my finger on the reason why my charm and persuasive skills were failing me so miserably, I eventually realized that the fundamental problem was what I have since labeled, Organizational Ego.
Organizational Ego is a form of “group think” that sometimes develops within professional associations, trade groups and similar organizations that are governed by a common set of rules, regulations, guidelines and standards. These organizational constitutions serve not only to bind members to the organization, but also tend to foment a strong sense of organizational self. Yet despite the positive aspects of this self-awareness – and there are many – eventually and inevitably, self-awareness gives way to self-righteousness. Before I take this any further, let me be clear that it is not my intention to portray ‘ego’ as a dirty word. On the contrary, a healthy ego is an essential ingredient in the success of most (if not all) highly motivated leaders and entrepreneurs. However, when an ego develops in an organization, no one takes ownership or responsibility for controlling it. Instead, organizations start thinking of themselves almost as a monolithic body, often without reassessing its value, currency, relevancy or general viability at any given point in time.
Fast forward to 2007: During the past several years, many of these organizations have found themselves drifting away from their original vision/mission and increasingly at odds with their own members and stakeholders. Why? There are a multitude of reasons, but most are rooted in the failure to change with the times. And, the organizational ego – often developed and nurtured over years or even decades – inherently resists change, often in direct opposition to what constituents are saying they want. If this seems like a weird and convoluted notion, perhaps it is; but I’ve seen it happen in several of the organizations to which I myself belong, so I know it’s real.
That said, let’s get back to the co-location concept. Clearly, a lot has happened since entering the twenty-first century that we can’t afford to ignore: Indeed, the 9-11 attacks, corporate scandals, 2003 Northeast Blackout, ubiquitous Internet and pervasive wireless communications have individually and collectively changed even the most basic rudiments of how we conduct business. When it comes to conferences, trade shows and the like, almost everything has changed there as well. Gone are the days of going to conferences to get away for a few days at a luxurious resort destination; today, it’s all about educational content, tangible results and above all – controlling costs. At the same time, the vast information resources of the Internet have caused many to attend these events for very different reasons than they once did – or in many cases, not at all. Indeed, travel logistics in a post 9-11 world are far more complicated and enormously more expensive than in the earlier tranquility we all enjoyed previously. Moreover, the allocations of time and money to specific tasks have been subjected to unprecedented levels of scrutiny, especially as the human resources needed to carry out those tasks rapidly diminish.
I don’t think I even need to get into the security frustrations of trying to get even a laptop from one city to another, let alone crates of electronics, sample instruments or entire systems. And, you can pretty much forget about carrying on any lubricants, solvents or even a can of compressed air for cleaning out your keyboard. Now, multiply that by a few thousand people, a few hundred companies and a half-dozen or so events each year, and the result is some very expensive chaos. We’ve grudgingly come to accept these annoyances, but I just can’t believe that there isn’t a less painful way to do this without inadvertently killing the whole concept of these vitally important industry events.
Let me be clear that I’m not suggesting any organization should merge their event into that of another organization, thus, constituting absolute heresy to the organizational egos of both entities. But why not consider a slightly different approach whereby multiple events are simply co-located? That way, neither organization needs to relinquish its identity or its constituency and all can preserve the bulk of their organizational and financial independence.
As you might have guessed by now, this is not a lark nor (unfortunately) is it an original idea. The concept is squarely based on the world-renowned Hannover Messe (messe being the German word for fair – as in trade fair) held in Germany where they have been doing it that way for over 60 years. When the 2007 event convenes in on April 16-20, it will incorporate over a dozen individual conferences, each of which with its own identity and member/attendee following. The scope of topics ranges from energy to micro-technology with broad focus on technical innovation and creative application of existing knowledge, as depicted in the following event profile as posted on their website: http://www.hannovermesse.de.
“HANNOVER MESSE remains the world's leading showcase for industrial technology. Better, faster, more effective: to survive and prosper in the face of global competition companies need to constantly maintain and improve their performance potential. Leading-edge technology plays a pivotal role in corporate competitiveness. HANNOVER MESSE is the ideal place to obtain the latest industrial know-how. Established almost sixty years ago, the Hannover Fair today ranks as the leading international showplace for industrial technologies, materials and product ideas. Over the years the focus has shifted from stand-alone components to end-to-end solutions. Technical innovation is one key element in the success of HANNOVER MESSE. Another is its sharp focus on the creative application of existing knowledge. Only at Hannover can the visitor experience complete value chains and swap information with experts from a complete spectrum of industrial sectors.”
I’m sorry, but with all due respect to the many fine trade and professional organizations out there, someone will have to explain to me how following the Hannover model could possibly be a bad idea. (In my mind, sixty years of success speaks volumes.) The time has come for conference organizations – along with their owners, managers, members and attendees alike – to take stock of their futures and consider alternatives to the downward spiral that many have experienced over the past several years. I can’t help but wonder who will be first to take the bold step toward creating the kind of messe we can all be proud of.
- Mike
Behind the Byline
Mike Marullo has been active in the automation, controls and instrumentation field for more than 35 years and is a widely published author of numerous technical articles, industry directories and market research reports. An independent consultant since 1984, he is President and Director of Research & Consulting for InfoNetrix LLC, a New Orleans-based market intelligence firm focused on Utility Automation and IT markets. Inquiries or comments about this column may be directed to Mike at MAM@InfoNetrix.com. ©2006 Jaguar Media, Inc. & Michael A. Marullo. All rights reserved.
After writing that column, I personally followed up with a half dozen conference organizers to see if I could turn the concept into reality. But while most of them listened politely to my co-location concepts and nodded at all the appropriate junctures – indicating that they understood what I was saying – I soon realized that all I was getting was lip service. After much reflection on those conversations, I came to realize that I hadn’t really gotten to first base with any of them.
In trying to put my finger on the reason why my charm and persuasive skills were failing me so miserably, I eventually realized that the fundamental problem was what I have since labeled, Organizational Ego.
Organizational Ego is a form of “group think” that sometimes develops within professional associations, trade groups and similar organizations that are governed by a common set of rules, regulations, guidelines and standards. These organizational constitutions serve not only to bind members to the organization, but also tend to foment a strong sense of organizational self. Yet despite the positive aspects of this self-awareness – and there are many – eventually and inevitably, self-awareness gives way to self-righteousness. Before I take this any further, let me be clear that it is not my intention to portray ‘ego’ as a dirty word. On the contrary, a healthy ego is an essential ingredient in the success of most (if not all) highly motivated leaders and entrepreneurs. However, when an ego develops in an organization, no one takes ownership or responsibility for controlling it. Instead, organizations start thinking of themselves almost as a monolithic body, often without reassessing its value, currency, relevancy or general viability at any given point in time.
Fast forward to 2007: During the past several years, many of these organizations have found themselves drifting away from their original vision/mission and increasingly at odds with their own members and stakeholders. Why? There are a multitude of reasons, but most are rooted in the failure to change with the times. And, the organizational ego – often developed and nurtured over years or even decades – inherently resists change, often in direct opposition to what constituents are saying they want. If this seems like a weird and convoluted notion, perhaps it is; but I’ve seen it happen in several of the organizations to which I myself belong, so I know it’s real.
That said, let’s get back to the co-location concept. Clearly, a lot has happened since entering the twenty-first century that we can’t afford to ignore: Indeed, the 9-11 attacks, corporate scandals, 2003 Northeast Blackout, ubiquitous Internet and pervasive wireless communications have individually and collectively changed even the most basic rudiments of how we conduct business. When it comes to conferences, trade shows and the like, almost everything has changed there as well. Gone are the days of going to conferences to get away for a few days at a luxurious resort destination; today, it’s all about educational content, tangible results and above all – controlling costs. At the same time, the vast information resources of the Internet have caused many to attend these events for very different reasons than they once did – or in many cases, not at all. Indeed, travel logistics in a post 9-11 world are far more complicated and enormously more expensive than in the earlier tranquility we all enjoyed previously. Moreover, the allocations of time and money to specific tasks have been subjected to unprecedented levels of scrutiny, especially as the human resources needed to carry out those tasks rapidly diminish.
I don’t think I even need to get into the security frustrations of trying to get even a laptop from one city to another, let alone crates of electronics, sample instruments or entire systems. And, you can pretty much forget about carrying on any lubricants, solvents or even a can of compressed air for cleaning out your keyboard. Now, multiply that by a few thousand people, a few hundred companies and a half-dozen or so events each year, and the result is some very expensive chaos. We’ve grudgingly come to accept these annoyances, but I just can’t believe that there isn’t a less painful way to do this without inadvertently killing the whole concept of these vitally important industry events.
Let me be clear that I’m not suggesting any organization should merge their event into that of another organization, thus, constituting absolute heresy to the organizational egos of both entities. But why not consider a slightly different approach whereby multiple events are simply co-located? That way, neither organization needs to relinquish its identity or its constituency and all can preserve the bulk of their organizational and financial independence.
As you might have guessed by now, this is not a lark nor (unfortunately) is it an original idea. The concept is squarely based on the world-renowned Hannover Messe (messe being the German word for fair – as in trade fair) held in Germany where they have been doing it that way for over 60 years. When the 2007 event convenes in on April 16-20, it will incorporate over a dozen individual conferences, each of which with its own identity and member/attendee following. The scope of topics ranges from energy to micro-technology with broad focus on technical innovation and creative application of existing knowledge, as depicted in the following event profile as posted on their website: http://www.hannovermesse.de.
“HANNOVER MESSE remains the world's leading showcase for industrial technology. Better, faster, more effective: to survive and prosper in the face of global competition companies need to constantly maintain and improve their performance potential. Leading-edge technology plays a pivotal role in corporate competitiveness. HANNOVER MESSE is the ideal place to obtain the latest industrial know-how. Established almost sixty years ago, the Hannover Fair today ranks as the leading international showplace for industrial technologies, materials and product ideas. Over the years the focus has shifted from stand-alone components to end-to-end solutions. Technical innovation is one key element in the success of HANNOVER MESSE. Another is its sharp focus on the creative application of existing knowledge. Only at Hannover can the visitor experience complete value chains and swap information with experts from a complete spectrum of industrial sectors.”
I’m sorry, but with all due respect to the many fine trade and professional organizations out there, someone will have to explain to me how following the Hannover model could possibly be a bad idea. (In my mind, sixty years of success speaks volumes.) The time has come for conference organizations – along with their owners, managers, members and attendees alike – to take stock of their futures and consider alternatives to the downward spiral that many have experienced over the past several years. I can’t help but wonder who will be first to take the bold step toward creating the kind of messe we can all be proud of.
- Mike
Behind the Byline
Mike Marullo has been active in the automation, controls and instrumentation field for more than 35 years and is a widely published author of numerous technical articles, industry directories and market research reports. An independent consultant since 1984, he is President and Director of Research & Consulting for InfoNetrix LLC, a New Orleans-based market intelligence firm focused on Utility Automation and IT markets. Inquiries or comments about this column may be directed to Mike at MAM@InfoNetrix.com. ©2006 Jaguar Media, Inc. & Michael A. Marullo. All rights reserved.
